Jump to content

Axxxeman

Members
  • Content Count

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Axxxeman

  1. Axxxeman

    Tube amps Gone?

    Dear Spikey, it's not about volume or at least not about volume alone. On stage / in rehearsal room I have "my" space that extends from my amp a few feet from the drummers right hand side (seen from the audience) to the center of the stage. I will have a monitor box directly in front of my Helix and my mic. One only, we are no pros. If I do not want to be stuck there, I need to hear myself in "my" other areas, too. That job will be done my the amp. BTW, live we use full stacks each. One speaker box sends out my own signal, the other one comes from the other guitarist's amp (who has the same setup on his side beside the bass amp. This way it works great. And volume cannot be sooo high on monitor speakers on stage for avoiding microphone feedback. If I could hear me only by the monitor box, it would be a pretty stationary gig ... ;) Maybe, one day, with in-ear-monitoring ... B) You might be surprised, but I don't think that way. Modelling WILL become accepted live in the same way as it is now in the studio. Still I don't think that it will take a little bit time until this will be mainstream. "Pro" to me does not depend on what equipment you use, but how good you succeed to entertain your audience. Not less, no more. Still I always will come back to my own experience: I want my tube amp in my back for practicability. (AND sound reasons - I am so happy with my Marshall's sound) reasons All concerts I heard so far from bands without a classical backline had a bad sound, at least a bad FOH sound. This might have reasons that are way beyond the question of backline or not, but ... suspicion stays on ... B) Well, thanks for your compliment on my "language", but it is partly leo.org ... and I did by far not understand all you were stating, because leo does not know all of your expressions. But I definetely DID understand "PEACE"! So I say, too. What a great complete agreement :lol:
  2. Wow, that sounds like a good step into the correct direction, thank you very much, Rickster!!! But some question keeps being open. I was experimenting with parallel mode only, but did not yet establish it. My experiences come from serial FX loop use of the parallel Marshall FX loop path. If you set the Mix-knob of the Marshall to 100%, then you get a perfect serial loop ... That is at least, what the Marshall manual is stating. But I am no technician at all and there might STILL be a parallel "component" in the game. It seems plausible to me, after what you wrote. But if Marshall is wrong here, then how to correct it? There is another FX path (pre-amp out / power amp in), but Marshall does not recommend using it, but with hi-class studio effects. And ... I did not get it to work with the helix so far. No signal coming through at all. With the cheap DigiTech I had previously it worked (3-cable-method), but not with Helix and 4CM. Any suggestions what could be the cause of this prob??
  3. Axxxeman

    Tube amps Gone?

    No use arguing with someone who keeps WANTING to malinterpret statements and reading only what he wants to read. If you' are not doing it intentionally, my apologies, but then you might want to consider that not all here are native english speakers. And, as you recognized absolutely correctly, I have no motive whatsoever to devaluate what I own personally. I was merely stating my experiences and not only my own ones, but also of many, many pros. From time to time I do go to concerts and I do like to talk to other musicians, especially guitarists. Here we are in a helix forum where it is self-evident, that the strong followers of modelling amps are concentrated. But that does not "prove", that your opinion about tube amps can be generalized. In the contrary, I would LOVE to be wronged, because right now I've got a big incompatibility prob with helix and Marshall by 4CM and things would be a LOT easier, when I could establish some amp simulation and go directly into the PA. But still I am not yet convinced enough to rely just on some tiny monitor speakers with another guitarist running a full backline in the band ...
  4. So far I unfortunately made no big progress on the main topic. All is running now as it would be expected but for two unacceptable issues: There is a feedback loop somewhere in the signal chain and I cannot find its source. Whenever I am not playing the guitar and the Helix' volume pedal is up, there is a fast increasing screaching sound just like a really bad feedback. But mind, this is happening with guitar volume being cut to zero! Still feedback rising, so it is NOT the classical guitar/amp feedback. It happens somewhere else. And it happens even with NO FX whatsoever turned on apart from noise gate! The FX that are put in the Send/Return path do not really convince. A delay, for example has an audible quality drop. With a mix rate set to 50% it should be equally loud as the original signal, but it is not, it is muted. And the sound itself is kind of mutilated (little high frequencies), independently, which delay type I choose. So this solution is worse than with the cheap DigiTech multieffect pedal I was using previously ... :wacko: It is also worse as using the classic 3-cable method (send/return) which I do not want to use, because then the HELIX' wahwah pedal sounds absolutely lollipop. To my assessment, both problems mentioned above are caused by the same error. If there is any MARHALL user out there who knows how to avoid this signal chain mess, please help ...
  5. Axxxeman

    Tube amps Gone?

    Why are you twisting around my words? Here is the original quote: "Well, if you hear no difference, then you may well abstain from using a good amp ... ^_^" If you feel embarrassed that I used the word "good amp" ... well, that's because there are not ONLY good tube amps out there, a thing, I was assuming you could agree to. Well ...
  6. Axxxeman

    Tube amps Gone?

    As stated above, before buying a tube amp one or two years ago, I WAS testing several amps, among those some actual LINE6 combos (modelling). The tube amps (Fender Blues junior and the Marshall DSL 15) were by far (!!) the winners of this test. I was not able to test the helix in a band with two guitarists so far, but I will surely do so soon.
  7. Axxxeman

    Tube amps Gone?

    Of course I believe in it. Because I believe in what I have experienced many times. That's what every intelligent being hopefully does, you included. If your experiences are different, well all the better for it. And concerning "volume creep": I suggest using two master volumes (either in your amp, if it has it, or volume pedal or output levels, if you prefer playing helix), one lower for rhythm, one for lead. Do a soundcheck to test the combinations and off you go ... no need to raise volume by hand anymore.
  8. Axxxeman

    Tube amps Gone?

    LOL, who's the snob here? I was just saying, if there's no difference in it for you, forget the amp. And you come with insulting suggestions ...? Well, if that's your personality, then have it your way. I prefer staying in an objective level. About my level of experience: I am 53 yo and playing the electric axe since I was 14. I was playing on transistor amps first, not having the money for a Marshall. Later I switched to a modelling amp (Line6 POD directly into PA). Only a few years ago I was buying my first tube amp, a small one for sessions and later a big one for the band. Have you EVER been playing with a transistor or a modelling amp alongside a guy with a tube amp? Well, I have done so, in many projects. The experience was ALWAYS the same: Having the same volume (!) and a good sound, side by side with a tube amp guy, my (transistored or modelled) guitar got lost in the overall sound, even via PA. That's where sound pressure comes in as you sure know. Sound and sound pressure make together one impression, so you can treat it like one impression in a discussion, too. You may not encounter these problems, when being the solo guitarist in a band, but you sure do, when you have the constellation described. I even had to leave a band once exactly because of this problem, because at that time I could not afford a tube amp and it does not do, when the lead guitarist's sound does not come through in spite of having an acceptable volume. Volume and sound pressure are obviously different things, too! Well, no more of these problems, since I have my tube amps. Mind, I am NOT talking about studio work here, I would always prefer to work with a modelling amp supplemented maybe by a Digitech FreqOut in such a surrounding. Conclusion: when playing with two guitarists, sound pressure gets equally important to the sound itself. And so far I have not encountered any serious alternative to a tube amp, nor in rehearsal room, nor on stage. If you do not have this situation or if you have found an alternative that works, well, great! You must definetely work with what works for you. But don't be as arrogant as to think that your perspective is the only one valid! BTW, ask any pro in hardrock (that's the music I talk about here), whether he would do without his backline ... And I tell you another thing: EVERY band I heard in concert so far, that did not employ a backline (95% or more do, though), had a crappy sound. Always. And yes, I know that some parts of the backline are only there for showing off and actually not used. And of course I know that some bands put their amps in sound booths backstage and do only in-ear-monitoring, but they still use their tube amps. Never asked yourself, why, when something like a Helix is so much easier to control and much more reliable than such a old-fashioned tube technology thing??? Just for nostalgic reasons? You might want to think again!
  9. Axxxeman

    Tube amps Gone?

    Well, if you hear no difference, then you may well abstain from using a good amp ... ^_^
  10. Axxxeman

    Tube amps Gone?

    Simple question, simple answer. A pro will hardly do without his tube amp on stage. Why? Because it's not only about sound, but also about sound pressure. And in respect to the latter there is NOTHING yet to replace a tube amp. Believe me, I have done some serious testing recently, tube amps, transistor amps, modeling or virtual amps, as combo or with monitors. If it were for sound reasons alone, you could easily skip your tube amp, e.g in a studio ...
  11. Right. And it is almost working, apart from the strange effect, that when switching by MIDI into the lower master volume setting (I don't even change channels here) and having the solo FX (reverb and delay) turned off, I get this feedback loop I can't explain. No level editing on the Helix, no preamp, no amp, no cabinet whatsoever. It is all happening in two snapshots of the same preset. What I shall try next: Changing the send- and the return-blocks into a single fx-loop block Programming a sound from the scratch with one of the templates for 4CM inside the Helix and look, what happens. But this still will not explain how to run Helix FX in parallel amp fx loop Another question here: I programmed most Helix effect blocks (reverb, chorus, phaser) as stereo effects, even when only using a mono output. Could this maybe have such an effect as described, that the signal gets double the volume, when turning the stereo effects in a mono surrounding off??? Hardly imaginable, but still ...
  12. Hi folks, being a newby on Helix I dare another question here. I am using the HELIX just as a multi-FX-board and as a control panel for my Marshall JVM410H. I love the amp's sound and would not have another one (as long as the Marshall won't go down. If one day it would do so, I plan to use the HELIX' DI-OUT with an alternative set-list with amp, cabinet etc. directly into the mixer). First step was to control the amp's sounds by MIDI Program change mode which worked absolutely perfectly. No need for the amp's footswitch anymore. :) Second step was using the 4CM in order to put the Wahwah at the beginning of the signal chain and delay etc. after the MARSHALL's pre-amp. I've been watching this video for instructions: https://youtu.be/Wvz3L8bJb1w Well, I've been doing as was said here, but the results were so bad, so that I had to switch back to standard send-/return (3 cables). So, maybe someone can help me with this problem, by answering a few questions: My amp has 2 effect loops, one serial (preamp out, return) and one that can be used in a serial (by putting the mix knob on 100%) or a parallel mode (mix 50%). The latter has the big advantage, that the original signal stays in the amp while the Helix (when its effect mix configured correctly) delivers just the FX signal, while the Marshall mixes the original with the Helix' FX to an optimal sound ... in theory. Now in the tutorial it says, that the amp's SERIAL FX loop should be used. Well ... is that so, that good results can get achieved ONLY with the serial FX loop? I ask, because MARSHALL does explicitely not recommend this, if you are not using hi class studio rack effects. Well, no idea, whether the HELIX qualifies as such ... ;-) I learned, that in the HELIX' preset you have to add a send/return block each. But then, there is a "fx loop" block, too. Is this the same thing as one send with the return block combined? I DID make it work, even in parallel mode by putting the delay's mix to 100% and the amp's return mix to 50%. Sounded great. Problem was: when I chose a Helix' snapshot of the same preset that has no active effects but noise gate (as I do many times for rhythm sound), there is some screeching and loud humming that I cannot explain. Even when I turn the guitars volume to total zero, there is a feedback loop somewhere and I cannot find its cause. So I have no idea, where to search. But like this, you cannot use this setting at all. Anyone any ideas? Sorry, if I repeat some questions for the hundredths time, but the forum's search routine could not find answers to my questions ... I appreciate any help, because I need the Wahwah and the delay. First one sounds crap in Send / Return, second one sounds crap in front of the Marshall ... HEEEELP! :(
  13. Oops, good, you mentioned this. I have the editor 2.21 running on notebook, editing HELIX 2.20. And so far it worked flawlessly. So I will do a downgrade on the editor software now. THANKS for this hint!!
  14. Ah, now I understand, thank you. Hope it works this way :-)
  15. Then LINE6 maybe should think again and find an offline solution. There is no possibility to connect to the internet at this place, not even with a smartphone.
  16. Okay, I'm stuck. I have downloaded everything on my computer, editor, latest driver, updater. But there was no installation guide. And without connecting to the Helix you can't use the updater, because in both online and offline mode it just shows a screen, where you must (but can't) select a device ... So obviously the line "None of this requires the Helix device to be connected." does not seem correct anymore. Or did I make some mistake somewhere?
  17. Why, that sounds fine. I will try out your solution. Thank you!
  18. In the description here you find information on firmware update for the Helix: http://line6.com/support/page/kb/_/effects-controllers/helix/how-to-update-the-helixs-firmware-r776. If I understand this info correctly, this means that I need a running internet connection for the update. The problem is: There is no WiFi, nor any other internet connection in our band's rehearsal room whatsoever. And I'd hate to transport the helix more often than I have to, at least until I've got a flightcase for it. So my question is: Is there a way to download the firmware file and install it offline?
×
×
  • Create New...